Hallo, gents. This is COMPLETELY unrelated to WW2, but I figured this may interest some.

Want an idea of the problems educational publishers are facing now? Look for the book "The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn", by Diane Ravitch.

"Before Anton Chekhov and Mark Twain can be used in school readers and exams, they must be vetted by a bias and sensitivity committee. An anthology used in Tennessee schools changed By God! to By gum! and My God! to You dont mean it. The New York State Education Department omitted mentioning Jews in an Isaac Bashevis Singer story about prewar Poland, or blacks in Annie Dillards memoir of growing up in a racially mixed town. California rejected a reading book because The Little Engine That Could was male.

Diane Ravitch maintains that Americas students are compelled to read insipid texts that have been censored and bowdlerized, issued by publishers who willingly cut controversial material from their booksa case of the bland leading the bland.

The Language Police is the first full-scale expos of this cultural and educational scandal, written by a leading historian. It documents the existence of an elaborate and well-established protocol of beneficent censorship, quietly endorsed and implemented by test makers and textbook publishers, states, and the federal government. School boards and bias and sensitivity committees review, abridge, and modify texts to delete potentially offensive words, topics, and imagery. Publishers practice self-censorship to sell books in big states.

To what exactly do the censors object? A typical publishers guideline advises that

* Women cannot be depicted as caregivers or doing household chores.
* Men cannot be lawyers or doctors or plumbers. They must be nurturing helpmates.
* Old people cannot be feeble or dependent; they must jog or repair the roof.
* A story that is set in the mountains discriminates against students from flatlands.
* Children cannot be shown as disobedient or in conflict with adults.
* Cake cannot appear in a story because it is not nutritious.
The result of these revisions are (no surprise!) boring, inane texts about a cotton-candy world bearing no resemblance to what children can access with the click of a remote control or a computer mouse. Sadly, data show that these efforts to sanitize language do not advance learning or bolster test scores, the very reason given for banning allegedly insensitive words and topics.

__________________
Seriously, all today is missing is free cotton candy and the annual Bay State Hooker Parade to make it any better.

Crazy, I see it happen every day over here, reading text books that try to be politically correct is really irritating though they haven't reached such a stupid level over here. It is a rediculous attitude that if you pretend issues don't exist you just make sure they stay around longer. The race and sex thing really irritates me. By taking Jewish people, women or black people out of novels often you loose the point (maybe Tom Sawyer and Huck Fin should be removed from their stories, since they are not exactly role models for our youth) and the fact is, its rather offensive. What I mean is, not intending to be racist so don't get me wrong on this, it assumes we are all the same. Frankly we are not, male, female, black, white, Jewish, Muslim, whatever or whoever you are, we are all different. Ignoring these differences is offensive in that it ignores all the fantastic cultural variations between people as well as physical differences (which can be just as important and valuable). As for the trying not to present steryotypes by creating new ones, they raise false hopes and make rediculous assumptions about people, apart from anything the whole thing creates an image of a world that doesn't and never has existed.

__________________
There's no honorable way to kill, no gentle way to destroy. There is nothing good in war. Except its ending.

Have you listened to Jello Biafra's talk on censorship?

Best regards/ Daniel

Interesting stuff, Stefan. I really know NOTHING about textbook publishing in other countries. Interesting to hear that some of the same issues are coming up over the pond!
This is a hell of an issue. The problem is, both sides have merit. I was talking with my girlfriend about this, and came up with a great example (although this example only really works in the U.S.)...
I think it is easy for most of us to agree that Native Americans should NOT be refered to as "Indians". However, herein lies the problem... if you are willing to agree that that specific example is reasonable to use for reasons of sensitivity, political correctness, etc.- what about the next example? And the one after that? Essentially, you run into the impossible task of "ranking" these issues people have. And trust me, it's more or less impossible to say "Well, THIS example is offensive enough to remove, BUT this OTHER example really isn't offensive." You just can't quantify "offensiveness".
And the other element that often gets ignored... textbook publishing is a BUSINESS. We have to sell our books to stay in business.

And if Texas says they will not buy a book that mentions global warming, well, what do you think we do as publishers? What CAN we do?

Difficult, but interesting stuff. I'd certainly be interested if anyone else has any thoughts...

charlie- oh yeah, although I don't remember it. Jello's stuff is usually DAMN good... and I'm sure he has a great bit on censorship... we are talking about the guy who wrote such classic songs as "Holiday in Cambodia" and "Too Drunk to ****"...

[ 14. May 2003, 11:43 AM: Message edited by: CrazyD ]

__________________
Seriously, all today is missing is free cotton candy and the annual Bay State Hooker Parade to make it any better.

Crazy, have you listened to Biafra?

Best regards/ Daniel

Interesting thread, I 've read something on that "politically correction" of classic works in the U.S. libraries and school / test books (coming from both sides, right-wingers and left-winger, guess that censorship is an affinity to all extremists).

We're just remembering the 70th anniversary of the the nazis burning books by Brecht, Mann, Kafka etc. because they were "politically incorrect" in their eyes. This day in 1933 was the best proof that the nazi ideology can't stand the test of critical thought and intellectual questioning. Burning all that books who were debunking the nazi ideology as the crap as it was, seemed to be the only solution for them.

Lesson for today:

Go to your school libary and ask for a book where a physically handicapped Nigger is having abnormal sex with his white teenage girlfried: She get's pregnat, but he convinces her to agree into an abortion, because it's too early to become parents. By not having a baby, she get's a good-paid job in the U.S. Army, makes money, has an affair with a married white, bisexual Colonel, but marries her old black loser boyfriend anyway. She get's a baby from a Jewish major who raped her, and consequentely hates that baby out from the bottom of her heart. However, she and her husband are happy and love each other and live their dream.

Alternatively, ask for a book about alcoholic Red Indians gamblers, the Holocaust-Industry, or what motivates people to sacrify thier lifes for captureing Jet airplanes and fly it into skyscrapers or war think tanks.

Alternatively, ask for a video tape of GWB getting combed and rouged, smiling, joking, before he get's on air to become deadly serious and declare war on Iraq to the nation.

Let me know if you succeed. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Cheers,

[ 14. May 2003, 04:34 PM: Message edited by: AndyW ]

__________________
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the War Room!"
(President Merkin Muffley in "Dr. Strangelove")

Crazy, I am not too sure about that. I mean fair enough, don't call Native Americans Indians. It is offensive and so on and so fair enough, just as you wouldent talk about 'yanks, frogs and polaks' in a text book (by the way, the same goes for Esquimos or Innuit as they prefer to be called). This doesn't mean that we should go through historical documents and change the word 'Indian' for 'Native American', just as when studying historical documents about racism in the deep south of the USA it would not be appropriate to remove all use of the word 'Nigger' because whilst it is offensive, taking it out of sourses would change their whole meaning and the use of such words must be understood in their historical context. See what I am getting at? Essentially in new documents it is definatly inappropriate to use racist or offensive terms however this does not mean removing them from historical sources and documents.

Andy: I forgot about the anniversary, rather ironic if you ask me. Good point to remember though, one mans 'political correctness' is anothers 'censorship'.

[ 14. May 2003, 05:24 PM: Message edited by: Stefan ]

__________________
There's no honorable way to kill, no gentle way to destroy. There is nothing good in war. Except its ending.

Crazy--I fully agree with you.

Did you know that close to all--if not everything allowed in textbooks--are things that are voted on by these textbook people--and these people are only in California, New York and Texas.

__________________
Lost are only those, who abandon themselves) Hans-Ulrich Rudel.

Steffan said:

. By taking Jewish people, women or black people out of novels often you loose the point

Urqh says, hmm...where would that leave Roots?

__________________
Prepare to repel borders.
William L. McGonagle, MOH, U. S. Navy, Commanding Officer, USS LIBERTY 1967.

INteresting stuff as always, gents. A couple points...

Andy- normal books in libraries ARE NOT being censored. What this refers to is textbooks and literature used in textbooks or schools . Luckily- no one is going through and censoring books willy-nilly. The censorship of literature you have probably heard of only appears in literature vo9lumes/selections that are specifically created for the school market.
But- you're right one this one- the textbook issue has plenty of grey areas, but the censorship of lit selections is REALLY catching a lot of fire. In that case, it is VERY easy to make the argument that simply a different lit selection should have been chosen. Not to mention that some still-living authors are getting more than a little annoyed that their work is being altered, with or without their permission.

Stefan... I do see what you are getting at. But the problem is, there are plenty of people who DO NOT see that. The problem here is really one that often gets forgotten- textbook publishing is a business- one that needs to make money. And that's where you get the major sensitivity problems and watering down. If an interest group in Texas (sorry, Carl- but it sounds like you too are aware of the role TX plays in textbooks) says that they don't want to see something... there's really no response we can come up with. If said interest group wants all references to, say, Gay people, removed- what are we supposed to do? Leave the gay references in- and lose out on Texas adoptions and hundreds of thousands of dollars?

Carl... unfortunately, that isn't entirely correct anymore. See, a bunch of other states have seen what TX and CA were able to do... and they're jumping on the bandwagon! You're right on the money for the most part- especially TX and CA have had the most influence up to this point on the content of textbooks. Actually, TX is the biggest content influence... CA dosen't push as much. TX started first, as well. But now a bunch of other states (including N.C., Florida, Virginia, Ohio... the list goes on) are starting to do some very loud pushing of their own...
:Crazy retreats further under his desk:

The really sad part... the idea behind all of this is in actuality a good one! I certainly believe that states and school districts, not to mention parents, shoudl be allowed input into what students are learning. And along those same lines... I certainly would not want P.H. to put out a book that offended people. The problem is that the whole thing has just gotten WAY out of hand, and people have taken things WAY too far.

Really interesting thoughts, guys!

__________________
Seriously, all today is missing is free cotton candy and the annual Bay State Hooker Parade to make it any better.

It's so nice to be ignored.

Best regards/ Daniel

Hi Daniel, who is Jello Biafra? I heard of Jello and there was a country called Biafra in the past but I have not heard of both. Is he or she on TV? Need more information on Jello to make a comment. Is he like Wavy Gravy or what?

__________________
Work Harder ! Millions on welfare are depending on you.

Not ignored, Daniel! Check my post right before yours- we were posting at same time, so I just edited my previous one!

Again, I don't remember his stuff at all- but I know I did check some of it out. And his commentary is usually great- I always found it impressive in his case (along with Henry Rollins, and likely a few others I can't think of) that an ex-punk rocker can put together spoken word stuff that makes many pundits/politicains look REALLY dumb. Always got a kick out of that...

TA- Jello was the lead singer for the Dead Kennedys. Responsible for, among many other classics, "Too Drunk to F**k" and "Night of the Living Rednecks".

__________________
Seriously, all today is missing is free cotton candy and the annual Bay State Hooker Parade to make it any better.

Thanks for the information. I guess I am not from that generation, but he sounds like Frank Zappa or my generation.

__________________
Work Harder ! Millions on welfare are depending on you.

*error*

[ 15. May 2003, 11:50 AM: Message edited by: General der Infanterie Friedrich H ]

__________________
"War is less costly than servitude, the choice is always between Verdun and Dachau." - Jean Dutourd, French veteran of both world wars

"A mon fils: depuis que tes yeux sont fermes les miens n’ont cessé de pleurir." - Mère française, Verdun

This is one of the threads which has pissed me off the most... It sounds like a new Index. Are we going back to the obscurantism age or the Holy Inqusition?

For God's sake! There are of course many books who have stronger material than others... therefore they should be read at different ages and periods, but censoring them is IDIOTIC.

Let's censore Plato's "Dialogues" because they actively promote homosexuality...
Let's censore Gustave Flauvert's "Madame Bovary" because it encourages adultery...
Let's censore Sofocles' "Aedipus" because it allows incest...
Let's censore Fijódor Dostoijévski's "Crime and Punishment" because it permits murder and stealing...
Let's censore Victor Hugo's "Les Misérables" because it accepts prostitution...



Backwards governments!

[ 15. May 2003, 11:52 AM: Message edited by: General der Infanterie Friedrich H ]

__________________
"War is less costly than servitude, the choice is always between Verdun and Dachau." - Jean Dutourd, French veteran of both world wars

"A mon fils: depuis que tes yeux sont fermes les miens n’ont cessé de pleurir." - Mère française, Verdun

Sorry about that Crazy. Jello Biafra's talk on censorship is really great. It's both interesting and amusing to listen to and I really recommend it to everyone here.

Best regards/ Daniel

Hi Crazy--THAT figures. I think somebody needs to let the air out of the tires on that bandwagon--or break their wooden spokes.

I dislike the "New" version of textbooks--ot the "NEW" way of doing things. The BEST textbook I ever had--was my Texas History book from the 7th grade. I recently saw their new replacement for that book--they had ONE paragraph to do with the battle for The Alamo! I sure saw red because of that.

__________________
Lost are only those, who abandon themselves) Hans-Ulrich Rudel.

Carl, I can assure you that our 2003 "Lone Star: The Story if Texas" has FAR more than one paragraph on the Alamo. Just off the top of my head- most of an entire Section, at least one Color Transparency Activity set, Probably 4 or 5 Teacher Resource Activities on the Alamo, at least one Internet Activity on the Companion Website... how that sound?
(Yes, I do work for a damn good company!! )

Friedrich, my friend- WHOA there! Again- literature is not being censored all over the place. The literature censoring you hear about only appears in a very few places. Almost entirely, literature censoring would be done only in a selection from some piece of literature that is quoted or used in a larger text. Of course, it is still an issue, but...
And another thing to remember- school districts have to buy books in large quantities. This means as publishers we have to aim for a broader appeal, often multiple grade levels. There's really no possible way to get around some of the watering-down...

One thing to keep in mind here, gents... there really are two sides to this whole thing. I mean, if you are a parent, wouldn't you want to have some influence in what your child learns? I know I will! And if some family, or group of families, does not want their children exposed to certain subjects- who are we to tell them how to raise their children?
It all really depends on your point of view. In my eyes, the issue comes from the kind of examples Carl notes above- when the pressure and watering-down has gotten to a point where textbooks are clearly negligent in many areas. It's definetely a tricky line, but I would like to see a good amount of relaxation on the part of the pressure groups and all the other yahoos who seem to know what all out children should be learning...

Daniel- is it on a CD or something? Title? I still listen to some of my old Rollins spoken word... could easily afford some more!
(Rollins does this one really light, hilarious comedy bit on airport public address systems and hearing someone named James Brown paged... I couldn't do it justice, but damn... has me rolling every time!)

__________________
Seriously, all today is missing is free cotton candy and the annual Bay State Hooker Parade to make it any better.

I don’t think it is like “uncut” textbooks are teaching them 10 year old boys how to practice sodomy...this is done on afternoon TV talk shows. Henry Miller and Bukowski are definately not something for a elementary school textbook, but I wouldn't have a problem letting it read by teenagers.

What disturbs me is all the hypocrisy in this: Basically all around the world parents doesn’t want their kids to learn too early:

a) things THEY did or learnt in that age
b) things THEY still do today

I always have a laugh imaging the family father ranting after Sunday morning church why Nabokov’s „Lolita“ is pornography, while having an affair with his secretary during the working week.

If I listen to my son playing with his friends, boy, I can tell you, it’s amazing how many swears and “politically incorrect” labeling of others individuals one can pack into one sentence! (“Boa, [beep], look at this [beep], I tell you, this [beeep][beep] is hardly goin’ to be [beep] before his [beep] mother-[beeep] is [beep] [beep]!”

I don’t think he got this from textbooks.

Nor did I when I was his age and was talking exactly the same way.

Cheers,

P.S. Henry Rollins is GREAT, saw him live about 9 years ago

[ 16. May 2003, 02:24 AM: Message edited by: AndyW ]

__________________
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the War Room!"
(President Merkin Muffley in "Dr. Strangelove")